November 14, 2011 at 9:57 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Network Databases? Is it time to change?
November 14, 2011 at 10:37 pm
What makes you so strongly say not to backup a SQL database across the network out of interest?
I've been doing this for a while myself, and found it very reliable in my environment and personally agree a lot with this article.
http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2008/09/back-up-your-database-to-the-network-not-local-disk/
November 15, 2011 at 6:22 am
Thanks for pointing out that new article about data files on network shares. That looks interesting and worth a shot.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
November 15, 2011 at 6:49 am
I haven't tried a data file on a network share yet.
On the other hand, data files on a SAN aren't really "local", but I have plenty of databases working that way.
As for network backups, I've been doing that for years.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
November 15, 2011 at 6:52 am
I do the backups locally, on a 2nd san. In a shared folder and then immediately kick in a test restore.
So I know right away if anything went wrong... which is the whole idea in backing up locally. Reduces backup corruption risks.
November 15, 2011 at 7:54 am
PhilipC (11/14/2011)
I've been doing this for a while myself, and found it very reliable in my environment and personally agree a lot with this article.
I have had it fail quite a few times in my career. If there is an issue over the network, then your backup fails, and any time savings are lost, and risk is increased. Perhaps if you have a very reliable network, at a 1Gbps speed, it works very well, but on 100Mbps switches, I've had it fail enough times to not consider it reliable.
November 15, 2011 at 8:18 am
There is still an advantage to have local backup or should I say at least three disadvanteges to not to.
1. Network issues
2. Discs on the backup (3rd party)
3. Timehandling as this 3rd party backup software usually backs up everything else as well.
So not having local backup can get you wishing you have had.
I use local backup to discs connected to SQL server and then let 3rd party backup software take backup on those.
Very secure and nice if you need to restore quickly.
November 15, 2011 at 10:36 am
I've been setting up database backups to occur over the network for years. The primary reason is that not every company I go to has enough disk space directly attached to keep the number of backups they want. You definately don't want to store your backups on the same physical disks as your data or transaction log files. There was only one place I was at which had a problem backing up over the network, but it was mainly due to their low end NAS device. I changed their backup files to store locally then get moved to the NAS immediately after and that worked.
On the other hand, I think that network speed still has a long way to go before I'd consider putting any data or transaction log files on the network. Disk I/O is the slowest part of the equation typically, and network I/O will be slower yet.
November 15, 2011 at 12:00 pm
We send transaction log backups directly to a network location to get them off the server. With the exception of one server that works well. For full and diff backups, those go to disk and then tape. One of the things in the works is a network location to store those backups and once that's set we'll have to find out if the network is more of a problem with the larger backup size. Based on what I've seen so far it wouldn't surprise me.
November 15, 2011 at 7:09 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (11/15/2011)
PhilipC (11/14/2011)
What makes you so strongly say not to backup a SQL database across the network out of interest?I've been doing this for a while myself, and found it very reliable in my environment and personally agree a lot with this article.
I have had it fail quite a few times in my career. If there is an issue over the network, then your backup fails, and any time savings are lost, and risk is increased. Perhaps if you have a very reliable network, at a 1Gbps speed, it works very well, but on 100Mbps switches, I've had it fail enough times to not consider it reliable.
I also had problems with it in the early 00s, with SQL 2k and 10-baseT networks. I think the first system I used that allowed reliable network database backups was in 2007, on SQL 2k5, 1 Gbs network, with small databases (none over 10 Gig, if even that).
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply